Medway Council has once again failed its children, this time the most vulnerable, as confirmed by a scathing Ofsted Report on its ‘services’ to children with Special Education Needs and Disabilities, published this week. The report concludes‘Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector (HMCI) has determined that a Written Statement of Action is required because of significant areas of weakness in the local area’s practice’. I think that is putting it politely. There are strengths identified; it just happens that all these appear to be down to the health service and not education.

Concerns centre about chaotic management of the ‘Service’, resulting in failure to take necessary action. This can be seen from the following quotes: ’Medway’s education and service leaders do not share one vision and strategy for SEN and/or disabilities…No arrangements are in place to ensure effective joint oversight and clear lines of accountability…Little progress has been made in addressing several of the pressing priorities for improvement identified as far back as 2012… Leaders’ understanding of what has and has not improved in the meantime is limited. I could have chosen many others.

'The collaborative work between professionals and children and their families to plan services and meet individual needs, known as co-production, is weak at both a strategic and individual level' This criticism is underpinned by the heavy criticism of the implementation of Education and Health Care Plans for children with the greatest needs, which are at the heart of Departmental work, and ‘A considerable number of parents shared concerns with inspectors that the needs of their children are not being identified and met sufficiently well’.

There is of course reference to Medway's record exclusion rates: ‘Although improving, rates of permanent and fixed-term exclusion are still notably higher for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities in Medway than for similar pupils nationally, as it is for all pupils. Lack of specialist provision has brought serious consequences for pupils with severe SEN or disabilities travelling out of Medway daily on long and very expensive journeys.

My own views on the lack of competence of the Education Service at Medway Council will be well known to browsers of this website. However the Council appears conditioned to ride unscathed through all criticism by monitoring authorities, with the changing cast of ineffectual senior politicians and officers making quiet noises of apology in their turn and assuming this will be sufficient. Surely, one day someone senior will be held accountable for the self-serving system which continues to fail Medway’s children – but I am not holding my breath.

Education and Health Care Plans (EHCP)

Special Education Needs and Disability provision across the country was reformed by the Children and Families Act of 2014, the SEND section published here. Statements of SEN were replaced by EHCPs, and are primarily issued for young people whose education would be significantly held back because of Special Education need or disability. The carry the force of law and schools and the Local Authority are obliged to deliver their requirements.

Four years later: ‘EHC plans are typically not coproduced in line with the expectation of the 2014 reforms.The varying and often poor quality of EHC plans means that those carrying out the plan do not have to hand key information which could help them ensure that children and young people’s needs are well planned for. EHC plans scrutinised by inspectors contained a variety of weaknesses. In some cases, key information was missing…Where a child or young person has a health need, this aspect is often missing from their plan’. Although I no longer have the capacity to support families through the EHCP process, I am still too often contacted by families desperate for help in the face of an uncooperative SEN Department, or drowning in the confusion created.

One of number of areas where the Report identifies failure to follow the law: ‘The local area’s approach to identifying and assessing children who have autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) does not meet national requirements’.

Provision

Due to a lack of sufficient local spaces, Medway places a high proportion of children and young people who have SEN and/or disabilities in provision outside the area…These ‘out of area’ placements use a considerable amount of the local area’s SEN budget. The high costs associated with transporting children and young people to this provision put a further strain on the budget… Leaders have rightly recognised the importance of increasing the volume of suitable local provision. However, there is no clear plan in place to successfully bring this about.

This all creates a vicious circle with insufficient specialist places creating a reluctance by Council officers to approve EHCPs whose requirements they cannot meet locally.

‘Some parents and school leaders reported that specialist transport arrangements for taking children to special schools and provision were not suitable. There are concerns that the bus escorts are not suitably trained to support children and young people with complex needs. One special school reported that the current transport provider is excluding some pupils from the bus rather than meeting their needs’. Quite reasonably, where there are sufficient SEN pupils travelling to the same destination, the Authority organises buses for transport, but others travelling a distance out of Medway will be sent by taxi. Surely, the Authority has had sufficient warning of demand to provide extra spaces locally and save on what will be an enormous budget.

Exclusions

I have been seriously concerned about the high rate of permanent exclusions in Medway for several years, most recent article in July 2017. The Authority has resisted providing me with relevant information for a considerable period and is now the subject of complaints to the Information Commissioner. ‘Although improving, rates of permanent and fixed-term exclusion are still notably higher for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities in Medway than for similar pupils nationally. Some schools have excluded pupils with SEN at increasingly high rates in recent years. Leaders in these schools have not done enough to improve the situation over time’. By comparison with Kent, an Authority six times larger than Kent, Medway had 81 permanent exclusions in 2015/16 compared with Kent’s 66. I am still waiting for Medway’s SEN figure.

‘Some mainstream schools are not effectively meeting the needs of children and young people with SEN and/or disabilities. This is particularly evident in the high level of permanent and fixed-term exclusions of children who have SEN but do not have an EHC plan’.

Medway Council Website

The Council website, exemplifies the confusion with no mention of Special Education on its main education page! Instead one has to choose 'supported learning', one of a large number of minor headings, which indeed leads to Special Education Needs, called SEN Support. However, this is situated in the Care, Health and Support Division of the council, Support for Disability section, not Education at all. This opens the door to a warren of pages, creating a fog of confusion for non-professionals, including several routes that turn back onto themselves and others with incorrect information, including a fairly useless Local Offer page, as required by law. As a contrast, look at the excellent KCC Local Offer page which offers a comprehensive and simple to navigate guide to SEN in the county.

Personal Apology

When I set up this website in 2016 to support my then appeals advisory service I had no idea it would expand into this 600 page sprawling giant offering information, news and comment about education issues in Kent and Medway. I now struggle with the enormous task of keeping the information up to date, and have considered cutting the scope down to assist in this. During much if this time I have been personally involved in Special Education provision and it was with great regret I had to give up supporting families seeking assistance as I found each case would absorb more time and resource than I could provide. Likewise, The SEN information sections of the website have unforgiveably become well out of date but I remain reluctant to close them down in the hope I can work on them. When I began, there was no alternative to this site for online information but, since then Kent and Medway have been required to publish detailed information and I would currently recommend families to consult the KCC Guide to SEND.

Finally

I have selected several aspects of the Report, but it pays reading as there are plenty of other failures. There are strengths identified, but these can be classified as mainly provision by the health service and some schools.

This all adds up to yet another monumental failure by Medway Council Officers, led by Director of Children’s and Adult Services Ian Sutherland, who was previously Interim Director, whose background is in social services, and Cabinet Member Councillor Andrew Mackness whose responsibility this is.

The victims are those Medway children who have special needs and disabilities. Urgent action is needed to provide properly for these vulnerable young people, whose life chances are too often damaged by Council failures. In the past when a Report on Medway failures is published, the response is (1) its not as bad as it seems (2) we will carry out a review and come up with proposals which then don’t turn into action.

The new Interim Chief Executive of SchoolsCompany Trust has apologised in a letter to parents of pupils at the Goodwin Academy for ‘previous financial failings, which are unacceptable’.

Sadly, this has come as little surprise to me, as I foresaw issues as early as 2014, when I noted in an article that SchoolsCompany had contributed to the startling decline of the predecessor school Castle Community College (CCC), in Deal from Ofsted Outstanding to Special Measures in three short years. As a reward SchoolsCompany took over as sponsor of the school as recently as July 2016. The school was awkwardly renamed SchoolsCompany Goodwin Academy, presumably to advertise the name of the Sponsors as a priority, above creating a new school image.

The Academy limped on for a period, after 2014, with the 'support' of SchoolsCompany, unpopular with a third of its places unfilled, and underperforming, although there have recent strong signs of improvement under new school leadership. Unusually, eight of the eleven Company Trustees were paid a salary by the Trust, hardly an inducement for encouraging scrutiny. After the school received a Financial Notice to Improvefrom the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) in October, seven of the Trustees resigned including the Executive Principal of the Company This left the school with just four Trustees including the CEO and founder of the company, Elias Achilleos, although he now appears to have been replaced by the new Interim Chief Executive. The Trust has demonstrably failed some of the Financial Notice's requirements for improvement.

The school will clearly have a future in its new £25 million premises opened four months ago on October 6th, just three weeks before Trustees resigned en masse, but it looks increasingly likely it will not be with Schools Company. Indeed a more than doubling of first preferences to 173 for 2018 admission, shows confidence in the school and its leadership, achieved without obvious input from the few remaining Trust members.

SchoolsCompany Academy Trust

This Academy Trust was founded on three small Pupil Referral Units in Devon 2015. It formally took over the Goodwin Academy in July 2016, just a year before being served with the Notice to Improve. The Trust was formed by Schools Company Ltd founded in 2011 by Mr Achilleos: ‘The company was created to build on our successful careers in teaching, managing and leading in challenging urban mainstream and alternative secondary schools, mainly in London and in schools across the UK’, Although its early ambitions were to take on a number of academies, unsurprisingly it has not been trusted with any more, but the company is now establishing The Royal Academy for Construction and Fabrication in Nigeria.

The August 2016 Trust Company Report, the most recent published (2017 promises to look interesting) reports that ‘There are currently deficits across the Trust. Details of the deficit and the arrangements in place to resolve the position are included in Note 18’. Sadly, whilst Note 18 details £1.4 million of creditors, there is no mention of any arrangements to resolve the position as promised. My expectation is that the current position has come about because of the preparation of the 2017 accounts, which have not yet been published (but see Angela Barry, below).

The 2016 accounts list eleven trustees, eight of whom received salaries from the Trust of between £80,000 and £20,000. Just just two of these, the Executive Principal and the Executive Principal of the Devon PRUs had an education role, but the other six, who are supposed to be independent Board members of a charitable Trust must have a financial conflict of interest. The dominance of those on the Board who financially benefited from its activities would inevitably have reduced the level of scrutiny required, which has surely contributed to the chaotic outcomes described below. Just four remained after the clearout in October 2017: Mr Achilleos, who in spite of the salary he took from the Trust appears to be part-time with various other ventures underway; Mr Akhurst, Chairman of the Trust Board, and project manager for a building construction company; Mr Parmar, an education consultant; and Mr Rees, a Legal Partner at Price Waterhouse who, whilst independent, surely had the background to identify the issues (the last three Trustees all unpaid). The Trust has completely failed the ESFA's requirement to 'immediately strengthen the Trust Board with RSC approved interim Trustees, no later than September 2017' and there were also a long list of additional requirements.

The Financial Situation

The Financial Notice to Improve is scathing in its criticisms of the Trust Management, concerns including: 'short notice and urgent requests for additional funding' and lack of 'the Trust’s response to this financial situation and this has been highlighted again by the failure to produce a recovery plan by the revised deadline of 17 July'. It continues by highlighting the Trust's failures: 'Failure to ensure good financial management and effective internal controls; Failure to have sufficient oversight over financial management and governance; Failure to take sufficient action to avoid the Trust’s current cash-flow deficit position; Failure to maintain and provide ESFA with accurate/robust budget forecasts; and Failure to meet the conditions of the additional grant funding as agreed in May 2016 and detailed in the grant letter of 21 June 2016'. All in all a damning indictment of SchoolsCompany's incompetence. Amongst the EFSA's stringent requirements are to: conduct an urgent review of all central trust income and expenditure to be incorporated in the recovery plan and submitted to ESFA by end of August; urgently seek independent verification on the closing position of the 2016/17 end year budget forecast position; implement action in line with the recovery plan to return the Trust to a surplus budget position during 2017/18; demonstrate that every possible economy is being made to achieve a balanced budget – this must consider the Trust wide SMT structure, service providers, curriculum provision and staffing costs across the four academies; provide an organogram of the central SMT staffing structure matching the current number of academies; and; provide the ESFA with monthly financial monitoring/progress reports mapping progress in these areas to work towards securing a balanced budget for 2017/18. Given this week's news, it looks as if the Trust has failed to met these conditions. These accounts record £398,013 paid out of Trust funds for Educational Consultancy. It is likely that most if not all of this was paid over to SchoolsCompany Ltd. There is also £52,904 paid over for governance, which appears a very high sum. Most accounts for Academy Trusts list the percentage of school budgets paid over to Central Services (to run Trust operations), commonly 5%. This figure is omitted from these accounts. In 2015, the Trust was running at an overall deficit of £36,649. For 2106, after Goodwin Academy joined the Trust, this deficit ballooned to £943,118, the £69,527 from Goodwin Academy to be sorted by a Recovery Plan agreed with the ESFA. There appears no plan identified in the accounts for the Central Funds of the Trust, running at a deficit of £243,205, down half a million pounds from the 2015 surplus of £249,447. There is no indication of where this money has gone.

In 2013, one of Mr Achilleos' many companies, several others having been set up last year with grand titles but no obvious activity, was declared insolvent owing £23,241 in unpaid tax.

The 2017 Accounts, anticipated in June 2018, should make interesting reading.

Goodwin Academy

The Academy appointed a new Principal, Simon Smith in 2016, who has had a long career at the school and its predecessors. You will find an excellent history of the good side of these schools, written by a Year 12 student, Arran Powell, here. Castle Community College was led by an outstanding headteacher, Christine Chapman, who took the school to an Ofsted Outstanding in 2011, although she left shortly before the Inspection to be replaced by Mr Phillip Bunn. At this time the school was heavily oversubscribed, but after she left it went into sharp decline, whilst neighbouring Walmer Science College was running short of numbers. KCC decided to merge the two schools , controversially on the CCC side, so Walmer was effectively closed. In March 2014, the school was placed in Special Measures, with Leadership and Governance being heavily criticised. An article I wrote at the time highlighted the responsibility of SchoolsCompany Ltd in the decline. That year the Year 7 intake had slumped to 127 with a PAN of 180, although it had also absorbed the children of Walmer. This year it is down even further to 108, which will have made a considerable contribution to the financial difficulties. In 2014, the school had the worst GCSE results in Kent with just 20% of pupils scoring five GCSEs Grades A-C, but has improved on this, year on year.

However, there are two pieces of excellent news for the school, the first being a complete rebuild for 2017-18. Secondly, and probably connected. the number of first preferences for admission to the school has more than doubled from 2017's 84, to 173 for 2018, nearly filling the school's PAN of 180, without second preferences being taken into account. There will still be some loss through grammar school appeals, but this all looks very healthy. I have no doubt that it is not only the shiny new premises, but the perceived improvement in school quality under the leadership of the new head that has contributed to this. I doubt if it has much to do with SchoolsCompany, where the blame lies, which with the loss of three quarters of its Trustees has little to offer.

Angela Barry

Angela Barry, the new Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Trust is by way of being a trouble shooter for the Regional Schools Commissioner, who has responsibility for academies in the South East. She is a member of his Headteacher Board, although retired from being CEO of a primary Academy Trust last summer. Followers of this website will know about her, as she performed a similar task for the infamous Lilac Sky Academy Trust (see below), until its closure in December 2016.

Lilac Sky Schools Ltd

This notorious company, which ran the now defunct Lilac Sky Schools Academy Trust (LSSAT) has crossed the path of Goodwin Academy/Castle Community College (CCC) a number of times.

When it was in favour with favour with KCC (as was SchoolsCompany), they were advising on CCC as it plunged from Outstanding to Special Measures in just three years, probably the fastest fall from grace in Kent. They worked with Principal Phillip Bunn who oversaw the decline and was so impressed with his work that he became a Trustee of LSSAT and their Head of Safeguarding. He resigned at the time Angela Barry joined the Board as Chief Executive, one of her first task being to withdraw the false 2015 Company Accounts and replace them with an honest set, highly critical of previous management.

Until we have further information, one can only speculate what has been going on behind the scenes at SchoolsCompany, but the financial difficulties and actions of the RSC appear similar to some at LSSAT, where the Trust collapsed owing large sums of money. We can be fairly confident that Angela Barry will face up to the difficulties.

]]>peter@kentadvice.co.uk (Peter Read)News and CommentsThu, 08 Feb 2018 10:43:51 +0000School Vacancies according to the 2017 School Census for Kent and Medwayhttp://www.kentadvice.co.uk/peters-blog/news-a-comments/item/1055-census.html
http://www.kentadvice.co.uk/peters-blog/news-a-comments/item/1055-census.html

As schools come under tighter financial pressures (never mind official news, but ask your local school how it is managing), pupil numbers become ever more critical as they generate the largest part of the income of each school. This article looks at a number of issues in Kent and Medway highlighted by the October 2017 schools census.

Which seven Kent secondary schools have more than 40% of their Year 7 places empty for September 2017?

Which four of these were more than half empty in Year 7 for 2016, with two over 40% for all of the past three years?

Which secondary school lost over a third of its cohort Years 7-11?

Which two secondary schools, one in Kent one in Medway, lost over a fifth of their cohort Years 9-11,

a pattern associated with off-rolling.

Which six grammar schools lost over 20% of their pupils at the end of Year Eleven?

What happened after last year’s Year 12 expulsion scandal at Invicta Grammar and elsewhere?

Which six primary schools (two in Medway) failed to fill half their places for each of the last two years?

Answers to these questions and more below.

Non-selective schools with vacancies.

For some years I have tracked schools with fewer than 60% of their Year Seven places filled. All but one of those appearing more than once in my list have closed after running out of money or pupils or both. THese are: Malowe Academy: Chaucer Technology College; Oasis Academy Hextable; and Pent Valley School. The one exception is High Weald Academy in Cranbrook, with just 40% of its Year Seven places being filled this year, according ot the October 2017 school census, 48% in 2016, and 32% in 2015. It also has the fourth highest drop out rate in the county (see others below) losing nearly a fifth of the Year 7 intake which fed into the latest Year 11 cohort of just 58 pupils, who left the school. For 2018 admissions, the number of first choices is down to 40, from 66 in 2017, so the future looks even bleaker.

It has a regular turn-over of headteachers, as the Brook Learning Trust which runs it tries without success to come up with a solution to keeping Cranbrook children in their local school. As far back as 2012, its occupancy rate was just 38% in Year 7. The main concern if it were to close is where the remaining local children would go to school, with no other secondary school nearby.

Brook Learning Trust also runs two other schools, both in the five emptiest, Ebbsfleet Academy and Hayesbrook in Tonbridge. All three have a high ‘wastage’ rate of pupils who joined the school in Year 7, suggesting that the key issue is with the Trust leadership. The previous CEO left the Trust in December 2016. None of these schools is in an area of high deprivation, where problems tend to be highest.

I have looked at the reasons for Ebbsfleet Academy’s unpopularity with families previously, including my article on Tough Love Academies. The school is situated in a high housing growth area, but this appears to make no difference, all the other Dartford schools bulging at the seams. The school filled 57% of its places, but sees pupils leaving for other schools or Home Education at a high rate. The current Year 11 has lost a quarter of its Year Seven intake, the second highest figure in the county. 4% of all the children in the school chose Home Education from September 2015 – Easter 2017 (the latest period I have at present), the highest rate in Kent.

The problem at Hayesbrook School, 52% of places filled and third emptiest, is more difficult to pin down, although this is an improvement on 2016 when just 40% of places were filled. Signs are that 2018 promises even less, with 55 first preferences for 2018 admission, down even from the 61 of 2018 and, at 36% of capacity is third lowest proportion in Kent (lowest is High Weald at 27%). Academically the school is one of the highest performing Kent non-selective schools, year on year, much better than its rival Hugh Christie which is as usual, full or nearly full. The previous headteacher appeared to be making an impact on cracking the problem but was discarded. Perhaps another new head appointed last September will make a difference.

Second highest proportion of vacancies in Year Seven is at Holmesdale School, in Snodland, with just 45% of its places filled, a sharp fall from the 79% of 2016, but reflective of other negative factors at the school. GCSE Progress Levels are amongst the worst in Kent, well below average, and below the Government Floor Standard, at which intervention can take place. The School website advertises this as ‘We are celebrating huge improvements in our GCSE results today’. Even more tellingly, Holmesdale had lost 34% of its Year 7 roll by the time they reached Year 11, according to the 2017 census, by some way the highest figure in the county, and well above Ebbsfleet, next on 24%. Some years ago when the school was very popular it joined in Federation with the then struggling Malling School, presumably to support it. Today, the situation is completely reversed, with Malling heavily oversubscribed with 214 first choices for its 159 places for 2018 entry, and Holmesdale down to 75 first preferences for 180 places (although up on last year’s disastrous 67).

New Line Learning Academy, part of the Future Schools Academy Trust, continues to limp along with just over half its places, at 52% filled in Year 7, although this is an improvement on 2016s’s 48%. The school has always struggled to throw off a negative image since it was formed in 2007 by merging two persistently failing schools. Future Schools Trust was one of the first multi academy Trusts in Kent incorporating NLL with Cornwallis Academy, then a very successful oversubscribed school. It was set up with an expansive ambition, but has only added the nearby Tiger Free School, a sign that government does not have confidence in the Trust to award it more schools. Cornwallis declined sharply in performance and popularity and the Trust was served with a Pre-Warning Notice for both schools in November 2015 because of low standards, with redacted items suggesting major problems with leadership. Cornwallis has made some improvement and was awarded a Good Ofsted grading reflecting the changes made by a new headteacher, but this remains puzzling as the school achieved a Progress 8 Grade of -0.51 at GCSE this summer, well below average, fifth worst in Kent and below the floor level at which government can intervene. In December 2016, the Cornwallis Notice was lifted, but NLL was served with a full Warning Notice , although its Progress 8 scores were much improved in the Summer 2017 GCSEs. The number of first choices for 2018 at 85, has improved over 2017s 75. On allocation in March 2017, it was awarded 146 children for its 210 places, but 50 of these who had not even applied to the school were allocated by KCC . A major problem for both schools in Maidstone is the grammar school appeal process. For admission in September, grammar schools were allocated around 200 additional children for places through appeals, the large majority of whom would have come from local non-selective schools. Pecking order then takes over in the non-selectives for the spaces that have been created, and pupils shuffle up through the schools from those at the bottom, Cornwallis and NLL each losing about 50 pupils.

Astor College, Dover, has filled 57% of its Year 7 places, down from 62% in 2016, with numbers have been falling year on year for at least five years, as the other two Dover non-selective schools have risen. This is another school that has received both a Pre-Warning Notice and a Warning Notice, with unacceptable standards and poor leadership being criticised. A controversial Ofsted two years ago did not help. Astor had one of the worst Progress 8 results in the county for GCSE in 2017, at -0.51, classified as Well Below Average, and below the floor level at which government can intervene. Strangely and falsely, the legally binding Annual Report of the Dover Federation from the Trustees, published in August 2017, claims on page 8 that the school's Progress 8 score was -0.22, supported by 32% of pupils achieving English and Maths at GCSE, the latter claim being meaningless without a level being given for the GCSE. Apparently this shows the college is performing 'extremely well' and is 'well within the tolerance level of Progress 8'. An astonishingly tolerant level! In yet another false claim, the Annual Report states that 'Astor has experienced a rise in intake this year (2017/18) because of marketing and publicity', when it is actually down by 5%. The Report also notes 'There is a risk of reputational damage caused by inadequate understanding of the context of our schools by Ofsted which could lead to unfair outcomes and reports. Reputational damage is also a risk from an event outside the control of Directors'.

The school has had close links with the controversial Duke of York’s Royal Military School which supported it from 2010 through a formal agreement which was concluded in February 2017, Astor being a National Challenge school at the start. Oddly, the Executive Head of Astor, together with support staff, ran Duke of York’s as Executive Principal between 2012 round to February 2017. I understand that investigations into DOYRMS are continuing. The school considered its falling rolls are partly due to negative publicity according to its 2016 accounts, which has impacted on its financial situation which is apparently to be resolved partly by future rising rolls! Currently, the school has a Pension Deficit of £4.3 million, and unlike other Trusts with with deficits, no obvious plan for eliminating it.

Lenham School (previously Swadelands) has had a chequered past, having been placed in Special Measures twice in 2008 and 20015, both as a KCC school. It suffers from its geography, having to attract pupils from South East Maidstone and North Ashford to make up numbers, which fell whenever it received negative publicity. It finally became an academy last March, sponsored by the Valley Invicta Academy Trust, and has seen its first choice numbers rise from 72 in 2017 to 95 for this year, a sign that it is winning back confidence. It filled 59% of its places in September, well up from 39% in 2016. However, reports of VIAT encouraging low performing pupils, especially those with SEN issues to leave part way through their course may be valid, with a 21% fall in numbers between October 2015 and October 2017 from the current Year 11 who will no longer figure in GCSE performance this summer. This is the highest percentage in Kent and is consistent with the practice of off-rolling described in an article I wrote based on January 2017 figures.

Up to this point in the article, no Medway schools have featured in the data I have looked at, but the Hundred of Hoo School lost 23% of its current Year 11 cohort from those in Year 9 two years ago, which also fits the off-rolling pattern. Two other schools lost over 15% of their cohort over this period, Aylesford School and Oasis Isle of Sheppey Academy.

Grammar Schools

Last January I published an article which unrolled into a national scandal, when I reported that Invicta Grammar in Maidstone had lost 26 students, or 15% of the cohort, at the end of Year 12, many being barred from entry to Year 13, in order to improve the school’s A Level performance. The large number of comments at the foot of the article page bear testimony to the heartless way these students were forced out of the school and the difficulties many of them had in finding an alternative way forward. Eventually, in September, the Department for Education declared the process illegal on a national basis. Also, with AS Levels being scrapped for last summer, meaning that it was in any case more difficult to set assessment requirements to filter entrants into Year 13, it is no surprise that the staying on rate Year 12 to Year 13 has increased substantially. It is impossible to examine non-selective schools in the same way, because they normally run a mixture of one and two year courses.

Even so, three grammar schools in Kent and Medway out of 37 shed more than 10% of their Year 12 students before going onto Year 13 this summer, headed by the controversial Holcombe Grammarin Medway, which lost an astonishing 22% of its Year 12 students. It was followed by Barton Court in Canterbury with 13%, and Dover Boys Grammar with 11%. Invicta Grammar, having clearly changed its policy as a result of the negative publicity, saw just 5% of its students leave at the end of Year 12, a figure which may be explicable through student choice.

Most families whose children start at grammar school anticipate their following through to Sixth Form. Nevertheless, some pupils have had enough of school, or in many cases more specifically their school, after GCSE or else are prevented from following A Level courses by ever increasing academic requirements as once again schools chase top grades. This blocks the many students who are perfectly capable of following A Level courses through for moderate grades which would have stood them in good stead for higher education or a career. The data is muddled as some grammars also seek to attract good A Level prospects from other schools, the most extreme examples being Dartford Grammar whose Year 12 expanded by 140 high performing students, many drawn from SE London, and Simon Langton Boys with 93, many of whom will have come from the other two Canterbury grammar schools.

Conversely, six grammar schools lost over 20% of their pupils after GCSE this summer, headed by Folkestone School for Girls with 29% of their girls departing. They are followed by Dover Boys 27%, Barton Court 24%, Norton Knatchbull 23% ,and Chatham Girls Grammar and Harvey Grammar at 21%.

Primary Schools

At primary level eleven schools in Kent and Medway have more than half of their Year R places empty, mainly small village schools, so this can simply be a property of small numbers of children in the area. Brenzett Primary only managing to attract six pupils for its 20 places. Brenzett, West Kingsdown, Halstead (all of whom have had a a chequered past), and Ramsgate Arts Free School, together with All Hallows in Medway had more than half their places empty in each of the past two years.

Final Thoughts

Each school which is struggling for numbers has its own story. An extreme example is All Hallows Primary, which is at the north end of the rural Hoo Peninsula, with little if any opportunity to recruit from a wider geographical. area. Note the number of times leadership issues come up in schools struggling for numbers, either with the school management or the governance or both. Schools like New Line Learning have a very difficult task as other more popular and successful schools fill up any vacancies from them. This also has the effect of, leaving the school to absorb children moving into the area who too often bring with them a poor or non-existent educational background. A 'Tough Love' approach does not work on the evidence of the three Kent schools I have covered. At least one of the schools above appears self-delusional.

An Ofsted failure, where there are alternative schools, can be a disaster in terms of recruitment. However, Swadelands is the only secondary school listed above to suffer this fate. At primary level, each of Brenzett, Halstead and West Kingsdown have all been down that route, along with a number of other schools just above my chosen cut off.

I have not given much time to primary schools in this article, all much smaller institutions than the secondaries. This is partly because with over 400 schools it is difficult to have a knowledge of more than a few of them. However, there remains no doubt, from reading Ofsted Reports and contacts with parents, that poor leadership is or has been a major factor of unpopularity in many of them.

Grammar school issues tend to fit into three categories. Firstly, there are the high pressure schools such as Invicta Grammar and Barton Court, where some children, often girls, have had enough and look for an alternative where they can rebuild their confidence. Secondly the areas of social deprivation, such as Dover and Folkestone, where grammar schools still admit a high proportion of children who can cope up to GCSE and achieve their grades, but do not see themselves, or else the school does not see them, as making a success of A Level. Thirdly, epitomised by Holcombe Grammar, schools that perhaps overachieve at GCSE, but encourage students on to A Level who should probably be advised to try an alternative to A Level.

Final, Final Thought

Given the rate of attrition of headteachers in many of these schools, especially in Multi-Academy Trusts, which good teacher is going to place their whole career in jeopardy by taking on the job of headteacher? All praise to those who do. Unfortunately, some will still lose their jobs because of the short term demands of those in charge.

This is the second year of the new GCSE assessments for measuring schools performance, Progress 8 and Attainment 8, which replace the long established 5 A*-C GCSE league table including English and maths. The key measure is Progress 8 (full table here) which looks at progress from the end of primary school to the end of Year 11, and is rightly given priority in measuring performance. Under this measure, Kent is slightly below the National Average of -0.03, at -0.11.

Attainment 8 (full table here) simply measures what it says, with Kent exactly equalling the National score of 46.3 ranked 60th out of all Local Authorities, although there is a variety of other statistics provided to choose from to suit your case.

Headlines: the Grammar School progress table is no longer the sole preserve of West Kent and super-selectives with four girls' schools invading the top eight. Highworth, Invicta, Folkestone Girls' and Maidstone Girls have joined Tonbridge, TWGGS, and Dartford Girls', leaving Dartford as the only boys school.

Top non-selective school is Bennett Memorial, one of six church schools in the top ten, the top three ever present also including St Simon Stock and St Gregory's. For the second consecutive year there are remarkable performances by Meopham School and Orchards Academy, neither of which have the built in advantages of other top performers. Six schools are below the government floor level with well-below average progress, down from eight last year, and so facing government intervention.

Five of the top six grammar schools on attainment are unsurprisingly super-selective in West and North West Kent - along with Tunbridge Wells Girls'. These are the same schools as in 2016, balanced by five boys and one mixed grammar at the foot. The Non-selective table is led by three church schools, Bennett Memorial leading the way above two grammar schools. Four non-selective schools are at the foot of both Progress and Attainment Tables.

Further information below. including the performance of individual schools......

Back in October, Government published provisional results to inform parents making secondary school choices, and allow schools to make a case for removing pupils in certain categories. This is an amended version of the article I wrote at the time, reflecting those changes, although in nearly all cases they are not significant.

Both Progress 8 and Attainment 8 are measured across eight curriculum subjects, English maths, 3 qualifications from sciences, computer science, history, geography and languages, and 3 other additional approved qualifications. The results are measured by an arcane formula whose meaning and spread is very difficult to comprehend, but enable schools to be placed in an order. For Progress 8 there is a target national average score of 0, with most schools being between +1 and -1. Both measures have had their methodology changed to suit government priorities and the new grading system for English and maths. As a result, numbers are not directly comparable with those of 2016.

The government floor standard, or expectation is to be above -0.5, in which case “the school may come under increased scrutiny and receive additional support”. and seven Kent secondary schools fail to meet this, including Simon Langton Boys (an exceptional case as explained below). There are further details of the outcomes below.

There appears to be a wholly artificial controversy being hatched about Cranbrook and Skinners' schools which both put a form of students in for the maths GCSE a year early. As a result, these results are discounted in the GCSE tables so, both schools are penalised in the Progress league table. This is simply a reminder that aberrations need to be looked at for an explanation, which is wholly forthcoming in this case, as well as Simon Langton Boys. Simon Langton Boys' Grammar, having had poor English GCSE results over a number of years, changed the course to have an iGCSE qualification from last year. As this is not regarded by the DfE as an approved qualification, it is discounted, hence the very low results. The school's explanation for the change is of course very different, describing the normal GCSE as 'boring and insipid'. However, an alternative view may be the poor performance of Simon Langton Boys at GCSE English for a number of years previously, for example here, although this does appear an extreme way of solving the English teaching problem!

Progress 8

Grammar Schools

I am not sure that in Kent, with the grammar schools dominating the top of the table, this proves they necessarily offer better teaching; rather, there is a strong element of – ‘brighter pupils can be stretched further’. Whereas last year, all but one of the top performers were super-selective or West Kent grammar schools, with second highest rated school by this measure being Tunbridge Wells Girls’ Grammar (not super-selective). The next five grammars include three more girls' schools: Weald of Kent; Simon Langton Girls; and Wilmington Girls, a total of ten out of thirteen.

Grammar School Progress 8 Scores for 2017

Highest

Lowest

School

Score

School

Score

All Well Above Average

Well Below Average

and below Floor Level of -0.5

Tonbridge

0.89

Simon Langton Boys

-1.39

Tunbridge Wells Girls

0.89

Below Average

Dartford

0.78

Oakwood Park

-0.26

Highworth

0.74

Chatham & Clarendon

-0.23

Invicta*

0.73

Average

Dartford Girls

0.66

Dover Boys

-0.06

Folkestone Girls*

0.66

Borden

0.01

Maidstone Girls*

0.58

Sir Roger Manwood's

0.04

However, the pressure to achieve results comes at a price and the three starred schools are amongst those with highest net grammar school leaving rates at the end of Year Eleven, headed up by Folkestone School for Girls which lost 29% of its girls after GCSE . Many grammar schools provide opportunities for other students by a net recruitment into Year 12.

Non-Selective Schools

Non-Selective Progress 8 Scores for 2017

Highest

Lowest

School

Score

School

Score

Well Above Average

Well Below Average and

below Floor Level of -0.5

Bennett Memorial

0.76

Hartsdown

-1.45

Meopham

0.57

Royal Harbour Academy

-1.2

St Simon Stock Catholic

0.54

Aylesford

-1.05

Above Average

Holmesdale

-0.7

St Gregory's Catholic

0.4

Cornwallis Academy

-0.51

Average

Astor College

-0.51

Duke of York's RMA

0.25

Below Average

Orchards Academy

0.19

Homewood

-0.47

St Anselm's Catholic

0.18

Spires Academy

-0.48

St John's Catholic

0.13

Northfleet Technology

-0.45

Hillview Girls

0.11

Sittingbourne Community

-0.43

Skinners Kent Academy

0.11

Dover Christ Church

-0.43

The highest performing non-selective schools are Bennett Memorial, third and Meopham School, tenth in the table of all schools including grammars, with a better result than twenty four grammar schools. Meopham and Orchards Academy, Swanley both in the list for two consecutive years, and with no obvious advantages, clearly stand out as schools with good teaching and learning. Seven of the top ten non-selectives were church schools.

At the foot of the table, are six non-selectives who are below the government floor standard and must be concerned at their performance which may well reflect on teaching and learning. These will be picked up by OFSTED on their next Inspection which should be brought forward, using this measure as a new key standard. Four have been here for both years of the new scheme: Hartsdown; Royal Harbour; Aylesford; and Holmesdale, all of which apart from Holmesdale also occupying places at the foot of the Attainment table. Astor College has now slipped into this category. Of the 'well below average' schools, Hartsdown in Thanet, was featured in my Tough Love Academies article serving an area with high levels of social deprivation along with Royal Harbour Academy both based in Thanet . Aylesford and Holmesdale were both oversubscribed a few years a go, but have been in rapid decline, and leaching large numbers of pupils. Holmesdale has the largest fall in the county, losing 34% of its Year 7 intake by Year 11 in October 2017, Aylesford the third highest loss of 21%. Aylesford is now to become an Academy sponsored by Wrotham School. Astor College in Dover has been declining for some years, with poor GCSE performances, culminating in a Warning about unacceptable standards from the Department for Education last year. Perhaps puzzlingly, Cornwallis College was pronounced 'Good' by OFSTED in November, although qualifying for Government intervention for being below the Floor Standard. Two reasons: firstly the Report records a new headteacher who has led the school on a journey of rapid improvement; secondly, the Report was based on the Provisional Progress 8 standard which just met the Floor Level with 0.5. I cannot see how it could have been awarded 'Good' if the final outcome had been finalised at the time of the Inspection.

Attainment 8

Here, scores come out as looking somewhat like a GCSE league table, but flattened at the top, with the score of 40 looking very similar in terms of the number of schools failing to reach it, the same figure as the now two year old Floor Level of 5 GCSE A-Cs.

Grammar Schools

Not surprisingly, here the grammar schools sweep the table completely, the top five being pretty predictable and the same as in 2017. Of special note is Tunbridge Wells Girls’ Grammar, the only school of the five to admit most of their intake with no element of super-selection, also second in the Progress table. Skinners is the only one of these schools not also at the top of the Progress 8 table, as explained above. Of the next ten highest performers, all bar Barton Court are girls' grammars.At the foot of both tables are Simon Langton Boys, Oakwood Park, Dover Boys, Borden and Wilmington Boys, all boys’ grammar schools, along with the mixed Chatham and Clarendon. As it is not clear what the numbers mean, all one can say is that the students of other grammar schools perform better by this measure.

Grammar School Attainment 8 Scores 2017

Highest

Lowest

School

Score

School

Score

Tonbridge

77.9

Simon Langton Boys

49.1

Judd

76.6

Oakwood Park

57.4

Dartford

73.8

Dover Boys

57.4

Tunbridge Wells Girls

72.1

Chatham & Clarendon

58.2

Skinners

71.5

Borden

60.6

Dartford Girls

69.7

Wilmington Boys

61.4

Non-Selective Schools

The highly selective Bennett Memorial Diocesan again tops the non-selective table, with two Catholic schools following, St Gregory's and St Simon Stock, the three along with Meopham School also at the top of the Progress table.

Apart from Duke of York's, a military sponsored boarding school, the other three highest performers were not in the list last year.

At the foot of the table apart from five of the six schools also at the bottom of the Progress 8 table, are Spires Academy, Sittingbourne Community College, Oasis Isle of Sheppey and New Line learning. New Line Learning, which is nearly half empty, along with several others on the list suffers from having to pick up newcomers to the area in considerable numbers, some of whom have little background.

Non-Selective Attainment 8 Scores 2017

Highest

Lowest

School

Score

School

Score

Bennett Memorial

57.3

Hartsdown

20.3

St Simon Stock Catholic

50.2

Royal Harbour

25.4

St Gregory's Catholic

49.8

Spires Academy

32.1

Duke of York's

49.1

Aylesford School

32.1

Mascalls

45.6

Astor College

32.2

Wrotham

45.3

Sittingbourne Community

34.2

Meopham

44.7

Oasis Isle of Sheppey

34.3

Hillview

44.6

New Line Learning

35.1

English Baccalaureate

This is a third measure towards which the government was trying to nudge schools, by measuring the percentage of pupils achieving a Grade C or better in five specific subject areas: English, maths, a science, a language, and history or geography. It is designed to encourage schools towards more academic subjects and away from those thought intellectually easier, which government considers is an easy way to score, although Progress 8 and Attainment 8 already go some way towards that.

Leading the List are Dartford Grammar and Tonbridge Grammar both with 94% of their pupils passing the required subjects, followed by Judd at 93% and Tunbridge Wells at 92%. Lowest grammar is Dover Boys with just 23%. Top non-selective school is St Gregory's with 28%, followed by Bennett with 23%, Valley Park with 18% and Hugh Christie with 17%. . At the bottom with no students meeting this standard are: Charles Dickens; Dover Christ Church; Hartsdown; Leigh UTC; Royal Harbour; and Simon Langton Boys (see above).

]]>peter@kentadvice.co.uk (Peter Read)News and CommentsFri, 26 Jan 2018 12:46:32 +0000Holcombe Grammar loses its bid to go Co-Ed. An excellent decision by the DfE in the interests of Medway children!http://www.kentadvice.co.uk/peters-blog/news-a-comments/item/1052-holcombe-grammar-loses-its-bid-to-go-co-ed-an-excellent-decision-by-the-rsc.html
http://www.kentadvice.co.uk/peters-blog/news-a-comments/item/1052-holcombe-grammar-loses-its-bid-to-go-co-ed-an-excellent-decision-by-the-rsc.html

I make no apologies for this being the fourth consecutive news item about Medway on this site but, as my previous articles suggest, the education system in the Authority has become unstable, with self-interest by academy chains driving decisions.

The controversial proposal for Holcombe Grammar School (previously Chatham Grammar School for Boys) to become co-educational has just been turned down for the second time by the DFE. This was no doubt for sound reasons, including those I have identified previously, most recently here. When the school first proposed the change, it made clear in its paperwork that it did not care about any damage a change would cause to Chatham Grammar School for Girls by increasing the number of girls' school places where there was already a surplus. It would also alter the balance of grammar school provision in Medway to just one heavily oversubscribed boys' grammar and three girls' schools, along with two mixed grammar schools.

This is one of the worst of a number recent proposals for change by Medway secondary schools, the reality being that neither Chatham grammar school was attracting enough local children to be viable in the long term at that time.

BUT: Congratulations to the Thinking Schools Academy Trust, which runs Holcombe Grammar School and features in most of my recent Medway articles, by being identified in a government analysis as the highest performing Multi-Academy Trust nationally in KS4 (GCSE) Progress 8 Assessment Tables

This is the third policy decision the school has failed with in the past two years, and the one with the most far-reaching negative effects on grammar school provision. However, the local scene has also changed dramatically in the short time since the proposal was submitted, with many London families failing to get their children into grammar schools in Dartford, Gravesend and Rochester, having now washed up in Chatham. Chatham Grammar School for Girls, having offered 143 places, including 16 Local Authority Allocations back in March 2017, itself an increase of 70% from 87 in 2016 as London children presented themselves, now has 183 girls in Year 7. I suspect this dramatic expansion was driven by the threat from Holcombe’s co-educational plan, and a need to secure numbers as the school was in financial difficulty. No longer!

Holcombe, which was happy to expand up to 180 children if it went co-ed, offered 128 places to boys in March, but settled with 161 (see below). It offered just 91 places in 2016. The London effect ensures that the two schools, both previously struggling for numbers are now both secure.

There is still a clear logic for one of the Thinking Schools Academy Trust (TSAT) grammar schools to become co-educational, but it is not Holcombe. Perhaps we shall now see a proposal for The Rochester Grammar School to admit boys as well, which would provide local children with two girls grammars, two boys grammars and two co-educational!

The Chief Executive of TSAT, in a letter to parents, claims two chief merits of the failed proposal which would ‘benefit all students in the local area’ (although these merits have changed with each launch). The first is the apparently enhanced choice for selective students in Medway, which is a nonsense in view of the reduction in opportunities for selective boys’ places. Secondly is a greater collaboration between Trust schools, although why this needs such a dramatic change in provision is not explained; surely greater collaboration can just go ahead as it stands. Whilst the letter explain that the DfE 'recognised the merit and potential of our application', it unfortunately gives no clue as to the reasons for turning it down! Naturally, most of the letter talks of the academic strengths of the school at present.

I do have concerns about the large number of Holcombe students who leave half way through their A Level course, 20% of the total this year, by some way the largest fall of any grammar school in Kent and Medway, which certainly helps with performance.

The other organisation with egg on its face is Medway Council which opposed the first application, but found favour with this second proposal, flying in the face of objections from most other Medway secondary schools, and certainly not in the best interests of most Medway selective students. Their capacity for misjudgment is enormous!

Other Controversies

This second failure to change the character of the school, which can be traced through from my original article in March 2016 certainly dwarfs the other two controversies.

Firstly came a plan to admit pupils by decision of an Admission Committee which would decide if they were selective, without having to pass the Medway Test. It is not clear if my publicly pointing out this was illegal led to it being dropped! This then morphed into a proposal to admit girls from the non-selective TSAT Victory Academy during Year Seven who were considered high flyers, although keeping them on the Victory Academy Roll. Notes of a meeting for parents record that only in exceptional circumstance would such girls be admitted into different age groups. In the event, all the younger girls offered places returned to Victory for their own reasons and does not appear to have been repeated for 2017 as a consequence. The only current evidence of the policy is three girls in Key Stage 4 classes, presumably all exceptions and all still on the roll of Victory Academy (to be on the roll of Holcombe would be illegal).

Secondly was last summer’s debacle when the school offered places to late grammar qualified applicants, and then placed them on the roll of Victory Academy, denying them the right of appeal. Sometime after I commented this was illegal, the Department for Education ruled the same.

Conclusion

If both these latter controversies indicate the sort of increased collaboration between Trust schools that TSAT seeks, it is hardly surprising that the DfE has turned down the proposal. The only surprise is that it has taken it nearly a year to come to this sensible conclusion!

It may even be somewhat of a relief for the school, which now avoids years of turmoil coming to terms with the change, when there is an inexhaustible supply of boys coming out of London.

There is a unique situation rapidly developing in Medway, in spite of challenges by the Council in previous years with nearly all secondary academies appearing to rush like Gaderine swine this year to give admission priority to schools in their Academy Trusts and limit options for families. In Kent, where the Local Authority also keeps a close eye on such matters, there is no evidence of anything similar after Invicta Grammar School withdrew their proposal.

In Medway, amongst the issues, it is proposed that pupils at over a quarter of all non-catholic primary and junior schools (excluding infant schools) and 38% of all primary and junior academies will be given priority for admission to specific grammar schools (some of these schemes are already in place). Pupils at half of all primary and junior academies will be given priority for admission to one or more linked schools, which poses an additional challenge for families choosing primary schools. Already fourteen of Medway's 17 secondary schools either have admission policies that give preference to children from named schools or are proposing to introduce them.

Medway Council's policy of encouraging all its schools to become academies has obviously played its part in this undesirable outcome, and is bound to see numbers of the tied primary schools increase as more change status. Currently, 42 of Medway's 65 primary and junior schools are academies.

I look below at the situation as it affects each of Medway's secondary schools and linked primary academies.………

A different development building on government and KCC policy, is that over half of all Kent grammar schools now offer some priority in admissions to pupils on Pupil Premium or Free School Meals. In Medway just Rainham Mark Grammar appears to be considering the same priority and no non-selective school in either Authority has proposed such a preference. I shall look at this further in a later article.

A number of the proposals are currently non-controversial as the secondary schools have vacancies for local children, as explained below but, with secondary numbers rising more will come into effect causing considerable unfairness on a greater scale.

The stated rationale behind several of these situations is continuity of teaching and learning style, but the major consequence is to leave parents in confusion. Should they make choices for their children entering primary schools at the age of four/five, on the basis of a linked secondary school when its popularity and circumstances seven years hence are unforseeable? My very rough rule of thumb is that it takes one year for poor leadership to damage a school's reputation, and up to five years of good leadership to restore it. The reality is that secondary school choice is now becoming much more of a lottery than it should be in Medway, as Academy Trusts look to their own interests rather than that of the children they exist to provide for.

All schools give priority to Children in Care, and most give priority to children with health reasons that need attendance at a particular secondary school, and most to siblings of children already in the school in question.

There is already considerable uncertainty caused by the Holcombe Grammar proposal to become co-educational, still under consideration by the Regional Schools Commissioner, which would create waves for boys on the Hoo Peninsula as explained below.

Note: There are several references below to Fair Banding Tests in the individual school comments, explained at foot of article.

The Issue

The government School Admissions Code, which has the force of law, states that proposed admission rules are to be policed by the Office of the Schools Adjudicator. In a key judgement the latter states that all oversubscription criteria must be judged ‘on whether the overall effect of the arrangements is reasonable (paragraph 1.8 of the Code) and fair (paragraph 14)’.

Two complaints to the Adjudicator about Medway grammar schools in 2016 differentiate clearly between under and oversubscribed schools, and can be regarded as guidance on what to expect from a complaint this year, although there are of course other factors taken into consideration and each case is considered on an individual basis. The two cases are outlined below, along with the proposals or current status of all Medway secondary schools. You will also find a table of all showing the primary schools belonging to all Medway Trusts with secondary members at the foot of this article. The name links are to the proposals for 2019 admission.

The Williamson Trust is trying for a second time to give priority to boys attending Trust primary schools for admission to SJWMS, having been previously turned down in 2016. You will find reference to this in my previous article.

The 2016 proposal of the school setting out new criteria for admission was rejected on a number of grounds, the key one giving priority to boys attending Trust primary schools being summarised by: ‘I then considered this criterion against the Code’s requirement in paragraph 14 that arrangements are “fair” and concluded that this criterion disadvantaged boys who live on the Hoo peninsula and who do not attend one of the trust schools. In this respect I have concluded that the arrangements are unfair.’ The objection was upheld.

SJWMS is heavily oversubscribed and, recruiting on distance grounds, draws most of its students from a tight urban area around the school. This results in virtually no boys, apart from siblings, from the rural Hoo Peninsula being offered places without appeal for some years. Along with the normal oversubscription criteria, the new proposals include: “Children who at the time of application attend a primary school within The Williamson Trust”, which is identical to thatrejected in 2016. Perhaps they are simply hoping there will be no complaints to the Schools Adjudicator from Medway Council, from other local primary schools who may lose pupils to the 3/5 Trust primary Schools, or from those parents who are now given difficult choices for children aged five or those who can see their children being discriminated against.

Holcombe Grammar School – Thinking Schools Academy Trust

The proposal of Chatham Grammar School for Boys (now Holcombe Grammar) in 2016, which also covers Victory Academy, considered the challenge by Medway Council that : ‘the inclusion of oversubscription criteria that give priority to children who have attended another of the trust’s schools in Medway or have a sibling in another of the trust’s schools in Medway disadvantage children who live close to the schools but who do not attend a trust primary school’. There are a number of other issues, but the bottom line for the Adjudicator is that: ‘I have been shown no evidence that there is an issue of unfairness for local children since they are likely to be able to gain a place at one of the two secondary schools if they are eligible to apply’. In other words, as both schools are undersubscribed, there is no unfairness, and the complaint was rejected.

The 2018 criteria which went unchallenged, as well as prioritising children of Trust Primary schools, expanded the common priority of staff children to those with a parent working at any Trust school, which is not in the Admission Code that allows priority for ‘children of staff at the school ‘. Whilst Holcombe Grammar was heavily oversubscribed with overflow from London children for 2017 admission, I am confident that all local boys who were grammar qualified and sought places at the school were offered these. Holcombe is one of just two Medway secondary schools whose proposed or established admission criteria for 2019 are not published on the Medway website. This will be because of the continued uncertainty of the school’s proposal to become co-educational, which has still not been ruled upon by the Regional Schools Commissioner, nearly a year on from its submission, as discussed here and previously. If the proposal is upheld, there will be a shortage of boys’ grammar places in Medway, and so the objection will come into place with meaning.

Currently, the school is the only option for most children on the Hoo Peninsula (the case for SJWMS prioritising some Hoo schools!), but if it were to go co-educational this could close down as many Hoo boys would be excluded on distance grounds, leaving the only grammar school route via a Williamson Trust primary school. Now that is a recruitment incentive attracting pupils for the Williamson Trust schools away from those who are not in the Trust!

You will find the proposal and my views here, in a previous article. Along with SJWMS, this will clearly be the most serious concern for families and primary schools, although it is difficult to say which school has set off the surge towards restrictive admission criteria across the Authority this year. Apart from Robert Napier School, the widest range of connections with priority proposed: girls at a TSAT Primary school, siblings at a TSAT secondary school; and children of staff at any TSAT school. Whilst the Admission explicitly approves ‘Children of staff at the school’ under specified circumstances, there is no provision for widening this across the schools of a Trust, so it is likely to be ruled unlawful. There are currently seven Medway schools in the Trust.

Fort Pitt appears to be the originator of these restrictive conditions, having had its criteria accepted without challenge some years ago, the Council Cabinet approving for Fort Pitt : ’The oversubscription criterion “Students who attend a school within the Fort Pitt Academy Trust” is amended to read as “Students who attend a school or who have a sibling in a school within the Fort Pitt Academy Trust.”’ back in 2014, and similarly for Robert Napier School, but oddly not for Thomas Aveling (see below). In point of fact, as all the Trust’s four other schools are within a two mile radius of the school, another priority, it is irrelevant, but no doubt serves as a marketing tool for the primary schools.

After the two mile cut off, Fort Pitt prioritises girls from the Hoo Peninsula. This is a key lifeline at present, as the alternative only for non-high scorers is Chatham Girls which, because of its location, is very difficult to reach from the Peninsula.

Proposes priority for an elder sibling at any UKAT school – currently just Brompton Academy. Although plenty of space for local children, so this is irrelevant, the school has expanded greatly in 2017 with London girls flocking in.

The only Medway grammar school (or indeed any Medway school) to give a priority to children on Free School Meals. The school has already radically changed its oversubscription criteria last year, moving away from high scorers to give priority to local boys and girls (closing off the Hoo Peninsula). The proposed priority for two local primary schools, appears irrelevant and is again likely to be simply a marketing tool for the two schools.

Also operates a Fair Banding Test for all applicants. See below for explanation. Second most oversubscribed non-selective school in Kent and Medway, with a very tight catchment area, and few successful appeals. A priority for children with an elder sibling at a UKAT school, currently would give priority where there are sisters at Chatham Girls, the other school currently in the Trust, which draws from a very wide area. The proposal may only apply to a small number of children, but there is no educational logic for this one, and it would be very unfair, and indeed unreasonable, to quote another section of the complaints upheld by the Adjudicator.

Usually just fills after grammar appeals remove a number of boys, so the restrictions become irrelevant. Gives priority to siblings at its neighbouring link school, Walderslade Girls’ together with historical siblings (have left the school in the past five years); also priority to Trust primary schools, just the one at present, Warren Wood under two miles away.

TKAT is one of the largest Academy Trusts in the South East, but RSG is its only secondary school in Medway, along with Napier Community Primary. It has made slight changes to the current criteria in its proposal, but retains the normal priorities, listed at the head of this section. Fully subscribed, but no need to offer priority to Napier at present.

The one Medway secondary school that is not an academy. Has a long list of admission criteria, set previously, revolving around the Catholic faith including, and unusually, non-catholic children from a list of ten Catholic priority schools including two out of Medway, but irrelevant as the school is unpopular with families, and has plenty of vacancies for all.

Regularly oversubscribed. Slightly different criteria to the other two Trust secondary schools, with proposed priority applying for an older sibling, or attendance at a Trust school from the beginning of Year 5. The close location of the three Trust primary schools, all less than two miles, would suggest that most of the latter should be awarded a place anyway.

Operates a Fair Banding Test for all applicants. Is proposing the same arrangement as Rochester Grammar, but being considerably undersubscribed, may well get this through. Alternatively, it may fall if there are complaints and RGS is also turned down.

Established criteria, including sibling at Greenacre, and historical sibling (having left the school in the past five years).

Medway Academies and linked Primary Schools

Schools

Academy

Trust

Primary

Schools

Brompton Academy

Chatham Grammar Girls

University of Kent

AT

None

Fort Pitt

Robert Napier

Thomas Aveling

Fort Pitt Thomas

Aveling AT

Robert Napier

Balfour Junior

Phoenix Junior

Greenacre

Greenacre AT

Warren Wood

Holcombe Grammar

Rochester Grammar

Victory Academy

Thinking Schools

AT

All Faiths

Cedar

New Horizons

Gordon

Howard School

Howard AT

Miers Court

Temple Mill

Thames View

Hundred of Hoo

St Joseph Williamson's

Williamson Trust

All Hallows

High Halstow

Hundred of Hoo (Primary)

St James CofE

Stoke Community

Hundred of Hoo

Rainham Girls

TKAT

Napier Community

Rainham Mark

Rainham Mark ET

RiversideTwydall

St John Fisher Catholic

Non-Academy

English Martyrs

St Augustine of Canterbury

St Benedict's

St Mary's

St Michael's

St Thomas More

St Thomas of Canterbury

St William of Perth

and two Kent schools

Fair Banding Tests: These are set for all applicants for places in some schools which are potentially oversubscribed. Then a proportion of pupils in each ability band in ratio to the whole population are offered places, aiming to replicate those ratios, and produce a good ability spread. I suspect that where there are grammar schools this has the effect of selecting a higher proportion of the top ability level children applying.

The Williamson Trust of six academies currently comprises: one grammar school, Sir Joseph Williamson’s Mathematical school (SJWMS) in Rochester; one All Through School - the Hundred of Hoo Academy (HofH); and four Medway primary schools, All Hallows Primary Academy; Elaine Primary Academy, High Halstow Primary School, and Stoke Community School, three of whom are on the Hoo Peninsula.

The Trust is a classic and certainly not unique example of the fallacy that a successful grammar school has the expertise to run other types of school with equal success. The Regional Schools Commissioner (RSC) for the South East formally raised concerns about Elaine Primary in December 2015, following up with a wider Letter of Concern about poor standards at Elaine, All Hallows and Stoke in January 2016. Then in April 2017, the Trust was issued with a Pre-Termination Warning Notice for Elaine Primary threatening to close the school by cutting off its funding.

Earlier this week, a Public Relations Company employed by the Trust sent out a Press Release, not mentioning any of this, but explaining in glowing terms how wonderful it is for Elaine Primary to have the opportunity to transfer to a small London Primary Academy Trust. No mention of the appalling education provided for its pupils for the last five years, and indeed further back under Medway Council.

This article looks at the issues around this decision in more detail along with a closer look at the Hundred of Hoo Academy and the Williamson Trust.

Elaine Primary Academy

Elaine Primary School became an academy sponsored by the Williamson Trust in September 2012, a year after an Ofsted Report found it Satisfactory (the now Requires Improvement category), one of a number of schools taken out of Medway Council control because of the Council’s poor performance; so a difficult beginning in an area with high social deprivation.

The Pre-Termination Warning Notice sets out the subsequent history of the RSC’s concerns, reporting consistently poor performance over a number of years. Ofsted Reports in 2014 and 2016, whilst identifying the school as Requires Improvement, both talk of the potential for better things, which sadly has not materialised. The school identifies the highlight of the most recent report on its website as: “Early years teaching is well led and provides children with a safe, nurturing and stimulating environment”.

Whilst under the threat of having its contract with the RSC terminated, the school produced the worst SAT results in Medway. Just 20% of pupils reached the Expected Standard of Achievement, the lowest figure in Medway and well below the low Medway average of 58%. But even worse, Progress in Reading, Writing and Mathematics were all Well Below Average, although it just scraped the government floor level, which it failed in 2015.

In addition, Medway Council had expressed concerns about Elaine to the RSC early in 2017, even before this dire performance, an action one hears about rarely.

It is crystal clear that either the RSC has acted to remove Elaine Primary Academy from its disastrous sponsorship by the Williamson Trust, or the Trust has abandoned the school, or both. However, one would never guess this from the enthusiastic press release by the PR company employed by the Trust to explain the failure away: ‘The transfer of the academy from The Williamson Trust comes after talks with The Inspire Partnership about how the academy can continue to develop and deliver the best education for its pupils’.

The reason for these amicable discussions is apparently that: ‘Elaine Primary Academy is not geographically a direct feeder school to either The Hundred of Hoo Academy or Sir Joseph Williamson’s Mathematical School – the Trust’s secondary schools’. Unfortunately, this fails to mention that SJWMS is consulting on new admission criteria for 2019 entry which, if approved, would give priority to pupils of Elaine Primary whilst it remained a Trust school, thus making it a direct feeder school, so the main claimed reason is false!

The Inspire Partnership currently comprises three averagely performing Greenwich primary schools who came together less than two years ago, none of which has a level of deprivation approaching Elaine’s. They are also Sponsoring Maundene School, the second lowest performing school in Medway, taking Progress Grades into account. It is difficult to see what expertise is on offer to provide the necessary support the Williamson Trust has so patently failed to provide for Elaine Primary.

The word ‘Inspire’ is itself an embarrassment for the Trust, as the previous CEO was one of those who ran the calamitous Inspire Special Free School, which crashed into Special Measures less than two years after they had opened it.

Hundred of Hoo Academy

Data updated: The popularity of HofH Academy, secondary section, has been falling from 2014, a year, when the school was oversubscribed with first choices on allocation, to 2017, when it had 44 vacancies (although having bizarrely increased its Planned Admission Number to 300). This was before 10 children who did not apply were allocated places to the school by Medway Council, most of whom will have lived on the Hoo Peninsula. Since allocation, the number has risen from 254 on allocation to 271 according to the October 2017 census, against the trend for non-selective schools which lose children to grammar schools after appeals. One can only speculate where these children, who did not apply for the school, have come from, but see next paragraph for what many subsequently decide.

To compound the losses, last summer’s GCSE group lost 36 children between Years 9 and 11. Such a loss is consistent with the pattern of off rolling to improve GCSE results described in a previous article, with the HofH percentage drop higher than all but one of the 120 Kent and Medway schools. Update: I now have the October 2017 census figures, which are even more alarming. These show a fall of 52 pupils from the current Year 11 cohort, since it was in Year 9, nearly a quarter of the original cohort, and another fall in the Year 10 cohort over the past twelve months of 38 pupils. These are consistent with the original figures for the number of children opting for Home Education from Hundred of Hoo, reported to me by Medway Council that there were 54 taken out of the school in 2015-16, and 23 by Easter in 2016-17, seriously worrying numbers. Then without explanation, the Council reduced these figures to 18 and 7 respectively. The matter is now in the hands of the Information Commissioner as the scale of the discrepancy is not a simple mistake, and census data points to the former and much higher figures as being correct!

One explanation for the sharp fall off is likely to be the reputation of the school as possessing a bullying culture, with little evidence it is trying to address the problem. I am aware of this both through direct parental enquiries about how to avoid the school, and from reliable second hand reports.

On the departure of the previous CEO of the Williamson Trust in the summer of 2016, the Principal of HofH became Trust CEO, and the academy still has an acting Head of School, suggesting there needs to be a much greater investment in quality leadership to sort out the issues at the school. Surprisingly, there has not been an Ofsted Inspection since 2012.

The proposal for HofH to offer priority in its secondary intake to children attending four of the Peninsula’s eight primary schools for admission in 2019 may seem an irrelevance at present given its unpopularity in the district and the high number of vacancies. Indeed, the precedent of the Schools Adjudicator suggests the proposal is unlikely to be successfully challenged at this stage, as there is no unfairness to children seeking places from non-Trust primary schools.

St James CofE Primary Academy in Grain is also identified on its own website and in Trust documentation (where Elaine has been prematurely deleted) as co-sponsored by the Williamson Trust school, but not on the Trust Website.

Hundred of Hoo changed to become an all through academy three years ago, and is proving a popular option in the primary sector, with 14 first choices turned away last year for Reception places, although we have no measure of performance yet.

The four primary schools all suffered under Medway Council leadership, but only All Hallows became a Sponsored Academy, the other two joining The Williamson Trust as converter schools. Because of its geographical isolation, All Hallows suffers problems with attracting pupils, just 9 for 30 places on allocation in 2017.

Sir Joseph Williamson’s Mathematical School

The flagship school of the Trust is a highly successful grammar school in academic terms, through offering a broad education and a wide range of opportunities, and through attracting funding for excellent facilities. It is also very popular, turning away 42 grammar qualified first choices in 2017. Currently the vast majority of its intake is drawn from the urban area around the school, with very few boys succeeding in winning a place from the Hoo Peninsula, because of distance grounds.

In 2016 the school attempted to introduce new admission criteria, with priority given to children who were at a Trust School, but these were rejected by the Schools Adjudicator on grounds of unfairness, give that the school is oversubscribed. Part of the Trust’s defence was that as so few boys passed the Medway Test from these four schools, just six for 2016 admission, not all of whom would choose the Math, the change was not significant, not exactly a powerful point.

It is therefore somewhat of a puzzle as to why the school is now attempting an almost identical set of admission criteria for 2019 entry, perhaps in the hope that no one will object to criteria that have previously been rejected where there is unfairness caused by oversubscription.

One further point about the school. It is very rare for grammar school pupils to drop out to undertake Home Education, and the Math is the only one across Kent and Medway to see as many as 4 boys leave under these circumstances for 2015-16 in Years 10-11. It also saw boys choosing to Home Educate, fewer than four, for 2017. There may of course be rational reasons to explain this unusual fall out.

Skinners School update: The headteacher has sent out a letter explaining the rationale behind the school's proposals. This confirms the driving forces, I have referred to below: Pressure on West Kent grammar places for boys; and the financial advantages to improve facilities.

Schools that operate their own admission rules are now publishing proposals for admission in September 2019 for Consultation, where they are making changes. Details for Kent primary and secondary schools that have posted their proposals here, and Medway here.

This article looks at the far-reaching changes proposed for The Skinners School in Tunbridge Wells which will give priority to Kent boys, and the failed attempt by Invicta Grammar in Maidstone to give priority to schools run by the Valley Invicta Trust.

A previous article looked at proposed changes at The Rochester Grammar School, again giving priority to its own schools, but now called into question by the Invicta situation, as explained below, and which has exposed a much greater issue in Medway, details to follow shortly.

A future article will look at other proposals including a number of schools extending priority to children on Free School Meals or attracting Pupil Premium (a slightly more comprehensive group).......

The Skinners School

The Proposal

The school has operated a fairly simple scheme for a number of years, with a Planned Admission Number (PAN) slowly increasing to 155 in 2017. The categories were, quite simply: (1) Children in Local Authority Care who have passed the Kent Test (a variation of which is required as first priority); (2) Applicants Ranked According to Test Scores.

For 2018, with an initial PAN of 150, an additional priority was inserted at Priority 2: Up to 10 places to pupils registered in that academic year for Free School Meals, ranked according to their combined test scores. Applicants in this category will need to have filled out a Supplementary Information Form. Subsequently, the PAN was increased to 160 on a temporary basis, maintaining the number of high scorers to be offered places.

The proposal for 2019 keeps the PAN at 160, but entirely changes the basis on which priorities are ordered. The first broad priority now becomes: Up to 140 places offered to applicants living in the West Kent Area which is defined as the area within three miles of the school measured by straight line distance, plus 33 named Kent parishes. However, this is then sub-divided with the first two divisions being Children in Care, followed by up to 5 places for those on Free School Meals. Then come children scoring over 360 in the Kent Test, headed by (a) siblings; and (b) sons of staff members. The remainder of the over 360s are no longer to be selected by high scores, but by nearness of residence to the school.

If there are any of the 140 places to be allocated by this mechanism are left unfilled, they will be made up by boys passing but scoring under 360, again in the order of (1) siblings (2) sons of staff members, and (3)nearness of residence to the school.

The final 20 places (minus Children in Care irrespective of residence) are then allocated to children in the Outer Area, defined as on the mainland of the United Kingdom, on the same basis as for the West Kent Area, the first five places again going to FSMs.

Implications

I have no doubt that these proposals have been encouraged by Kent County Council, keen to create extra local places for boys, possibly helped by additional funding for new premises. For 2017 admission, 44 out of county places were offered to high scorers, now to be reduced by up to 30 places, reallocated to West Kent Area boys (I don’t know how many out of county boys also meet the three mile inner criterion).

The school has moved right away from the concept of highest scores, and aligned the school along with Maidstone Grammar and Simon Langton Boys, who have similar arrangements also with a priority cut off of 360.

One question that will be asked by families living inside the outer limits of the West Kent Area, is whether all local over 360s will be offered places, or if there will be a geographical limit? Last year the cut off was an aggregate score of at least 371 for all successful applicants, up from previous years. I suspect this increase was because of the related decision by The Judd School to also prioritise most Kent applicants.My own sense is that all West Kent Area applicants scoring over 360 will be offered places, but don't hold me to it. I don’t believe that those families who will carry out complex calculations to estimate their chances will come to any more accurate conclusions on a subject with so many variables.

All this means the nature of Skinners will change with a number of boys being admitted with levels possibly as low as a Head Teacher Assessment pass; especially if the category of under 360 is reached which is possible. What is certain is that in a few years time, as with Judd, when these cohorts reach GCSE or whatever replaces it, the two schools will not be able to compete at the very highest level, as at present.

Congratulations to both schools on making decisions in the interests of the students, rather than chasing trophies for themselves.

Add in the increase in numbers at Tunbridge Wells Grammar School for Boys, and the pressing shortage of places for Kent grammar school boys in West Kent, brought about by the current non-arrival of a boys annex in Sevenoaks, will certainly be eased.

The Invicta Grammar School

Invicta, with its unofficial motto of never apologise never explain, has had to quietly withdraw proposals to give priority to girls attending primary schools in the Valley Invicta Academy Trust for admission in September 2019. The proposal is at the time of writing still on the KCC website, but if unavailable, you will find it here. It has been quietly replaced by the previous version on the school website, without comment.

The proposal made two main additions to the more conventional 2018 arrangements giving priority as follows:

d) Children who attend a Valley Invicta Primary School, a child who has attended a Valley Invicta Primary School who has passed the PESE test.

e) (Section in italics): Children of staff who work at the school, or Valley Invicta Academies Trust, full time with at least two years’ continuous employment or where the school Trust considers a member of staff has been recruited for a position for which there is a demonstrable skill shortage.

It is reported in the Kent Messenger that the proposal has now been dropped as KCC considered it ‘unreasonable, unfair and unlawful’, following a petition from parents. The KCC view is likely to have been based on a decision by the Schools Adjudicator following complaints about The Aspirations Academy Trust for one of its schools, Rivers Academy, Hounslow, dated 11 November 2016. This set an important precedent, which ought to have been known by Invicta and indeed The Rochester Grammar School, see below and previous article (which now needs to be revised!).

This is a complex decision, covering a whole range of issues, but the relevant conclusion was:

For the reasons set out in detail above, I uphold the objection to the oversubscription criterion in the 2016 arrangements that names two feeder primary schools which, while clear, transparent and made on reasonable grounds as required by paragraph 1.15, are not fair as required by paragraph 14 of the Code because it is unfair to children who have attended two other local primary schools and are not reasonable as required by paragraph 1.8 as they are not reasonable in their impact on these children. I also determine, for the same reasons, that the oversubscription criterion in the 2017 arrangements naming two feeder primary schools does not conform with paragraphs 14 and 1.8 of the Code.

Or more simply, it is unfair and unlawful to discriminate in favour of pupils from Trust Primary Schools in oversubscription criteria.

Whilst not expressing a view on the children of staff from other Trust schools, the same interpretation would clearly apply.

The Trust has clearly accepted the advice from KCC, more importantly implicitly acknowledging it is not appropriate for Valley Park School either, one of the most oversubscribed schools in Kent, where the consequences would have been much more serious.

The Rochester Grammar School and other Medway Schools

My previous article confirmed the welcome news that The Rochester Grammar School was stepping back a little from its super-selective status by ‘giving priority to girls who attend one of the Trust’s four local primary schools and those with siblings who attend one of the Trust’s three local secondary schools’, together with ‘Children of staff employed by the Trust ‘.

This clearly and more comprehensively breaches the Code, as interpreted by the Schools Adjudicator, above, and I have written to the school and Medway Council pointing this out, although missing the short Consultation Period. The school now has until 28th February to finalise its policy, after which complaints can be made to the Schools Adjudicator who has the final say. In the case of Invicta Grammar, it was parents who raised the issue before the consultation was completed, for Rivers Academy it was other local primary schools, who feared their popularity would be damaged who logged formal complaints.

I cannot see these proposals remaining unchanged, although it would be a great pity if RGS cannot come up with proposals that give some element of priority to local children, perhaps on the lines of the Tonbridge and Judd Grammar criteria that award places on high scores, but with 80/87% to local children and 20/13% to out of area, or even following the Skinners model above. There are plenty of other good models around that maintain the principle of chasing the high flyers to secure the best results.

Whilst looking at this case, I became aware of a number of other Medway schools, both selective and non-selective that also appear to be proposing to act unlawfully, to be followed up in an article currently in preparation.

Key Stage Two school performance for 2017 tables were published on Thursday, with 65% of Kent pupils meeting the expected standard for the second year running, well above the national average which was 61%. Medway was once again below average at 58%.

Government’s key measure is progress from Key Stage One (end of Infant stage at age seven) through to Key Stage Two, in Reading Writing and Mathematics. The best overall progress performances in Kent were by: Kingsdown & Ringwould CofE, Dover, and Bredhurst CofE, 16.1; Temple Ewell CofE, Dover, 15.0; Castle Hill Community, with 15.4, and Christ Church CEP Academy, 14.7, both from Folkestone; Canterbury Road, Faversham, with 14.6. Apart from Bredhurst, every one of these schools is in East Kent, showing that Progress is not a function of West Kent prosperity. Just one Medway school reached and also surpassed these levels, Barnsole Primary, with three outstanding progress scores, to total 19.1 (explanation of numbers attempted below).

In Kent, five schools saw every pupil achieve the expected achievement standard set by government: Rodmersham, near Sittingbourne, for the second year running; Ethelbert Road, Faversham: and Temple Ewell CofE in Dover, all three schools amongst the highest performers for each of the previous two years, and all three again in East Kent; together with Seal CofE, and Crockham Hill CofE, both in Sevenoaks District.

In Medway, Barnsole was again the highest performer with 89% of pupils achieving the expected standard.

Government also sets a Floor Target for all schools to reach, in either Progress in all of Reading, Writing and Maths, or Achievement. In Kent, 20 out of 414 schools failed to achieve either standard, with Richmond Academy, in Sheppey failing on all four counts. Medway had five schools out of 62 below the floor target.

I look more closely at all of the main categories below; you can see my 2016 report for comparison here. The article concludes with some advice to parents trying to select a primary school for their children.....

There are plenty of opportunities for many schools to claim a top position in one or more category, as shown in the following sections.

Progress

Progress levels are averaged across the country, the National Averages being adjusted to give a reading of 0.0. The large majority of schools will score between +5 and -5

Each child is measured in comparison with this average and schools are divided into bands, according to their average Progress Score in each subject.

Of the top six achievers, only Barnsole has all three progress grades as Well Above Average, whilst two others have two progress grades Well Above Average: Ethelbert Road and Temple Ewell CofE. Crockham Hill CofE and Rodmersham have two Average grades, suggesting they had high performing groups coming through from Key Stage One.

Just nine schools had all three Progress Grades assessed as Well Above Average. Three of these, Oasis Academy Skinner Street, Medway, St Mary of Charity, Faversham, and West Kingsdown CofE have all been in Special Measures in recent years. All are now academies, and these Grades confirm they are well on the road to recovery, with such excellent progress. Hernhill CofE, near Faversham, has been Awarded Kent's first Outstanding OFSTED Report this school year, up from Good in 2013, and Satisfactory (previous name for Requires Improvement) in 2011. That is progress!

Schools with all Progress Grades

Well Above Average

Progress

Subject

Reading

Progress

Writing

Progress

Maths

Progress

Kent

Castle Hill

5.3

4.7

5.4

Christ Church

CEP Academy

4.9

5.3

4.4

St Mary of

Charity CofE

5.7

3.6

4.5

Hernhill CofE

4.4

3.9

4.7

Hampton

4.3

3.4

4.1

West Kingsdown

CofE

3.4

3.0

3.5

Medway

Barnsole

7.4

4.6

7.1

Pilgrim

5.3

3.2

4.6

Oasis Skinner Street

6.2

3.7

4.4

Oaklands

5.0

4.9

4.3

Achievement and Expected Levels

Government has set a level that it expects all schools to reach, of 65% of children achieving the standardised score of 100, with 61% of pupils nationally actually reaching this: 65% in Kent and 58% in Medway.

High performing Kent schools were: Rodmersham; Ethelbert Road; Temple Ewell CofE; Seal CofE; and Crockham Hill CofE all with 100%. They are followed by Fordcombe CofE, Sevenoaks; Our Lady’s Catholic, Dartford; Elham CofE; Canterbury; and Brookland CofE, Shepway. In Medway, after Barnsole with 89% (also top in 2016), come The Pilgrim and Oaklands with 86%, followed by St Thomas More Catholic with 82%, and English Martyrs Catholic with 79%.

Lowest in Kent were: Tree Tops Academy, Maidstone 16%; Richmond Academy, Sheppey, Goodnestone CofE, Canterbury, both 17%; and Charing CofE, Ashford, and Darenth Community, Dartford, with 21%.In Medway, the only school at this level is Elaine Primary with 20% of pupils achieving the expected standard.

% of pupils achieving at a higher standard

Around 5% of pupils are regarded as 'achieving at a higher standard' which is defined as at least a standardised score of 110 in both their reading and maths tests, with their teacher also assessing them as ‘working at a greater depth within the expected standard’ in writing.

In two schools, Amherst and Leigh, both in Sevenoaks, 34% of pupils reached this standard, coincidentally both having 86% of pupils on or above the expected standard. Both these figures are well up on the highest percentages in 2016. Next come: Whitstable and Seasalter Endowed CofE Junior (88%) and Wittersham CofE, Tenterden (85%) both on 31%; Selsted CofE, Folkestone (86%) and Ide Hill CofE, Sevenoaks (79%, top last year) both on 29%; and Gateway Primary Academy, Dartford (90%) and Chiddingstone CofE (79%) both on 28% high performing children. 55 Kent primaries had no high performers, sharply down from the 121 of 2016.

In Medway, Barnsole Primary (89%) had 26%, and The Pilgrim (86%) had 24%. Seven schools had no high performers, again well down on 2016’s 19.

Floor Level

Schools that have a Performance of 65% OR Progress above all of: Reading -5; Writing -7 and Maths -5, are regarded as having reached Floor Level. If both are below this standard, the school can expect unspecified intervention by government, unless the miss is in writing only. 4% of schools nationally are in this category; however, the number in Kent has risen to 20 up from six in 2016, which at 4.8% is above the national average. Medway has seen the number of schools below Floor Level fall from five to three. Five of the Kent schools stand out, as below.

KS2 Floor Level 2017:

Lowest Five Schools

Achievement

Reading Progress

Writing Progress

Maths Progress

Richmond

Academy

17%

-7.4

-11

-10.1

Tree Tops

Primary

Academy

16%

-5.4

-0.5

-3

Charing CofE

21%

-6.6

-5.8

-3

Parkside Community

25%

-1.7

-7

-6

Knockhall Academy

29%

-2

-7.6

-5.3

Richmond Academy, Sheerness (bottom of the pile on nearly every count) and Knockhall Primary Academy, Dartford, are two primary schools both ruined by the appalling and now thankfully defunct Lilac Sky Schools Academy Trust. It would be wrong to blame the new Trusts which have taken over the schools, Stour and Woodland Academy Trusts who have not had time to repair the damage (pity about the children whose education has been blighted by TSSAT). Incredibly, the owners of Lilac Sky are still allowed to promote themselves under the new company name of Education 101, in Kent and elsewhere.

The children of Tree Tops Academy, Maidstone, were failed by KCC over many years, then again by Academies Enterprise Trust. In 2014, I wrote an article: “Is this the worst school in the country, run by the worst academy chain?”, tracing back the dreadful history of the school since 2004. The poisoned chalice has now been taken over by Leigh Academy Trust, but only this week it one of 130 schools nationally in in a list of shame published by OFSTED of schools that have not shown any improvement since 2005. It was also below the floor standard in 2016, although OFSTED in May described a very different picture of the performance of pupils unfortunate enough to have to attend the school: “By the end of key stage 2, the majority of pupils, including those who are disadvantaged, catch up and achieve similarly to the national average in reading, writing and mathematics”. These are the same pupils whose school has now failed them to deliver the worst SAT achievement of any school in Kent. How can OFSTED have got it so wrong??

Charing CofE Primary School, Ashford, also failed to reach the Floor Standard in 2016, and has been through years of turmoil as one of the more unpopular schools in Kent: “Parents have been justifiably concerned about the frequent changes in leadership and exceptionally high turnover in staff. Many parents chose to withdraw their children from the school, which led to a dramatic fall in numbers and impacted negatively on already small cohorts of pupils in each class. The number of pupils who have joined or left the school over the past two years has been very high.” This is taken from a glowing OFSTED Report of March 2017, which praises the turnaround taking place in the school under new leadership but again fails to notice the dreadful KS2 standard to be delivered for the second time just two months later. Progress Levels are particularly low. The school was taken over by the Aquila Academy Trust (Anglican Diocese of Canterbury) in July, so plenty of work to be done, although as a CofE Voluntary Aided school prior to conversion, will it be the same leadership that failed the children for so many years previously?

Parkside Community School, Canterbury had by some way the worst level of achievement in Kent in 2016, at 8% of pupils reaching the required standard, so this 25% could be regarded as showing progress, although actual progress levels are below floor standard in both Writing and Maths. OFSTED in February 2017 which awarded the school ‘Requires Improvement’, stated: “The headteacher and deputy headteacher work well together and form a strong team to lead the school effectively. They have managed the considerable turbulence in staffing and the changing profile of the school well. Despite a decline in the school’s performance since the last inspection and a legacy of underachievement, pupils’ progress and the quality of teaching and learning are now improving”, but perhaps theoutcome is not really a surprise: “Pupils in key stage 2 are not making enough progress to catch up from their low starting points at the end of Year 2”. It is not clear why this school, failed by KCC for many years is not at present being taken over by an Academy Trust, although Trusts are becoming increasingly picky about who they take on, and refusing to take on unpromising schools. Meanwhile numbers have fallen, just 50% of places taken up on allocation in April, and there are clearly parental concerns about possible closure, ‘Future of Parkside Letter’. Sadly, KCC promises have not always been delivered in the past.

Coasting Schools

Then there are Coasting schools, defined as underperformance over three consecutive years defined as follows:

Coasting schools are those where over three years, pupils are thought to not be progressing as much as they should.

The definition is based on three years’ of data and the expected attainment level and average progress needed to be made by schools in 2017 is the same as in 2016.

For primary schools, the measures are

*In 2015, fewer than 85% of pupils achieved level 4 in English reading, English writing and mathematics and below the national median percentage of pupils achieved expected progress in all of English reading, English writing and mathematics, and

* In 2016, fewer than 85% of pupils achieved the expected standard at the end of primary schools and average progress made by pupils was less than -2.5 in English reading, -2.5 in mathematics or -3.5 in English writing, and

* In 2017, fewer than 85% of pupils achieved the expected standard at the end of primary schools and average progress made by pupils was less than -2.5 in English reading, -2.5 in mathematics or -3.5 in English writing.

Schools must meet the criteria for three consecutive years to be deemed coasting. A coasting school is contacted by the Regional Schools Commissioner to consider its wider context, and decide whether additional support is needed.

I do not have the three year data to determine the Coasting schools.

Advice

You will find a wide range of information and advice in my Primary School Admissions pages here, but this section attempts to look at the 2017 Key Stage 2 data.

Treat all the data outcomes with a certain amount of scepticism. Firstly, there were all the problems with changes to the Test assessment process which ranged over the whole of the school year 2016-17, and which have been widely publicised. Never forget that schools are under immense pressure to deliver the best possible Key Stage 2 results. The future of individual schools are sometimes at stake and this set of results will lead to some schools being taken over by others, by Multi-Academy Trusts, or even transferred between them. Some headteachers will lose their jobs. Other headteachers will yield under pressure and manipulate outcomes, for example one method can be to reduce Key Stage One outcomes to improve the progress rate through to Key Stage Two.

Government sets performance levels apparently somewhat arbitrarily as a tool to achieve its aims, so it is impossible to say if standards have improved or declined. What is certain is that the pressure to succeed is ever greater, so (1) look at other features of schools important to you than simply these tables. OFSTED performance, although strongly influenced by this data, the ethos of the school, the headteacher, do you see your child fitting in, etc., (2) High attainment performance is an indicator of high ability children in the school or else good progress or both. Different families will choose different measures as a priority. (3) A sharp difference in progress assessments may be simply due to the teacher of mathematics (for example) having left, been ill or been on maternity leave with the school unable to make alternative arrangements. Find out if this problem still exists or has gone away (4) there appears currently an obsession in some areas over using the number of grammar school successes as a guide to a good school. Untrue and irrelevant. Firstly, this is six years of education away for the child entering a Reception class and many things can happen to change a school in that time. Secondly, success rates are likely to be related to the proportion of high ability children in the school. Thirdly, the tutoring factor which happens outside the school and applies to a high proportion of potential grammar school applicants is of considerable importance and is not reflected in these figures.

Primary school data is now far too complex for many parents to be able to compare schools and I suspect most will ignore it. However, if you put two schools together for comparison, accept all the caveats about poor data, look at what is important for you, if there are marked differences between the two it may prove helpful. However, bear in mind the enormous pressure on school places in many areas, and you may find you actually have no real choice at all! Sorry.

Finally

A recent OFSTED Report about a Kent school states:

This is an inadequate school. The school continues to undergo considerable turbulence. Pupils leave and join the school at irregular points. The turnover of staff is relentless. Leaders struggle to embed and sustain their carefully considered improvements. The tireless headteacher is frequently thwarted in her efforts to improve the school due to circumstances beyond her control.

I have now had further opportunity to look at data relating to the recent Kent Test outcomes for Admission in September 2018, with a summary of the statistics below. This article expands my initial lookat the 2017 Kent Test results, written in October, which should be read in conjunction with this article. The figures do not match exactly, as adjustments and late tests have produced changes.

Headlines are:

The proportion of passes for Kent school children has fallen slightly from 25.7% to 25.4%, made up of 19.1% automatic passes with a further 6.4% Head Teacher Assessment.

Girls are still ahead on both automatic test passes since the Test was changed in 2014, and also in HTAs, with the differentials widening to 26.6% girls passing to 24.3% of boys.

As in previous years, the highest proportion of HTA success is in East Kent, nearly twice the lowest in West Kent.

The proportion of passes for Kent school children has fallen slightly from 25.7% to 25.4%, made up of 19.1% automatic passes with a further 6.4% Head Teacher Assessment.

Girls are still ahead on both automatic test passes since the Test was changed in 2014, and also in HTAs, with the differentials widening to 26.6% girls passing to 24.3% of boys.

As in previous years, the highest proportion of HTA success is in East Kent, nearly twice the lowest in West Kent.

There is a further increase in the proportion of children on Pupil Premium found selective to 9.8% of the Kent state school total passes. This increase is brought about through headteachers recognising ability in the HTA, where coaching is irrelevant, with 37% of all PP passes being through this route.

As last year, the schools with the highest proportion of Kent successes are drawn from across the county. However, the schools are all different from last year: Bidborough CofE VC (Tunbridge ~Wells) – 69%; Stowting CofE – 67%; Bridge & Patrixbourne CofE (Canterbury) – 66%; Lady Boswell’s CofE VA (Sevenoaks); Ryarsh (Malling) – 62%; and Sheldwich (Faversham) – 62%.

There is yet another leap by 600 children in Out of County Passes, but going on last year’s pattern, only around 15% of whom will apply and be offered places in Kent grammars .

For more detail on each of these items, see below:

My previous article on initial outcomes contains links to many relevant items, and comments on related issues, notably pressure on grammar school places across the county.

Pass Mark

The pass mark level comprises, for the fourth year running, a nationally standardised score of 106 in each of English, Maths and Reasoning, together with an aggregate score of at least 320. This standard is intended to select approximately 21% of Kent resident children (given the large numbers it is difficult to hit this level precisely), although for the 2017 Test, it has produced just 19.1%. Additional children are found selective by the process of Headteacher Assessment (HTA) described here and below. The target here is 4%, but for 2017 the outcome was 6.4%, the two scores conveniently adding up to 25.4% of the peer group, very close to the overall target.

This mark is sufficient for entrance to the majority of Kent grammar schools, apart from seven that require higher marks for all or most of their entrants. The required marks for the latter will vary according to demand each year, and I will not collect this data until March. Further places can be awarded to individual schools by the appeal process; my recent article on Appeals reporting on 2017 outcomes.

Kent Grammar School Assessments 2017

for Admission in September 2018*

boys

girls

total

boys

%

girls

%

Total

%

Year Six Kent Population**

8798

8565

17363

51%

49%

100%

Number who sat test

5185

5528

10713

59%

64%

62%

Automatic Pass

1647

1665

3312

18.7%

19.4%

19.1%

Headteacher Assessment (HTA)

901

1038

1939

10.2%

12.1%

11.2%

HTA Passes

491

612

1103

5.6%

7.1%

6.4%

Total Kent Passes

2138

2277

4415

24.3%

26.6%

25.4%

Out of County Tested

4832

100%

Out of County Automatic Pass

2621

53%

OOC Headteacher Assessment

243

5%

OOC HTA Pass

114

2%

Total OOC Passes

2735

57%

Girls lead again

As with 2016, girls are performing better than boys in both the Test and HTAs, the test outcome being a reversal of the previous model, replaced in 2014. This change has been brought about primarily because of the introduction of a literacy element in the new Test which, according to the statistics, favours girls giving an advantage of 4% this year. Girls have always performed best on HTA, with a differential of 14% more in 2017. This gap will again reduce pressure on boys’ grammar school places, such issues being explored here.

School Performance

Overall, the best performing primary schools in terms of percentage pass rate from total pupil numbers are: Bidborough CofE VC (Tunbridge ~Wells) – 69%; Stowting CofE – 67%; Bridge & Patrixbourne CofE (Canterbury) – 66%; Lady Boswell’s CofE VA (Sevenoaks); Ryarsh (Malling) – 62%; and Sheldwich (Faversham) – 62%; Lady Joanna Thornhill (Ashford) – 58%; Amherst (Sevenoaks) – 58%; and Tunstall CofE (Sittingbourne) – 58%. With eight of these being different from the 2016 figures (Amherst and Lady Boswell’s both from Sevenoaks being the exception), mainly different again from the 2015 top performers, it is clear there is no such thing as ‘which are the best schools for grammar entrance’ a question I am regularly asked. This is because there is no way of knowing what proportion of the pass marks are down: to high quality teaching in the school; private tuition; or simply a group of bright children passing through. Just one of these schools, Tunstall featured in the ten Kent schools with the highest proportion of pupils gaining higher grade SATs in 2016, having come first equal out of all schools.

At the other end of the scale, whilst I think all Kent primary schools entered candidates, 16 had no successes, a number of whom are no surprise, for one of a number of reasons.

District Variation in Passes and Headteacher Assessment (HTA)

Last year 389 children qualified for Kent grammar schools through success in a local Test only, mainly in Dover and Shepway, doubling the proportion of grammar assessed children in those districts. I would anticipate a similar figure this year.

There is a 21% target of automatic passes across the county, although the pass marks this year gave 19.9%. There is also a target of an additional 4% of children to found selective by Head Teacher Assessment (HTA) which looks at children’s work, previous test results, headteacher recommendation and pass mark. Further detailshere. The actual outcome for HTAs was 6.4% of the total cohort found selective, arriving at a total of 15.4%, very close to the target of 25%.

In the table of District Performance below, I have separated three of the KCC Districts into component parts, as these each have a distinct profile of grammar school success. So: Sevenoaks Town and Sevenoaks rural; Tonbridge and Malling; and Tunbridge Wells and Cranbrook & Weald.

This highlights Sevenoaks Town as having by far the highest proportion of grammar school success, with 46% of all pupils being assessed selective. Next are Tunbridge Wells and surprisingly for many, Canterbury (see below), although this should come as no surprise for those who have followed this theme on the website before.

District Performance for Kent Test 2017

District

Automatic

Passes %

HTA

Success %

Total

Success %

Pupil Premium

Passes

Ashford

18

6

24

46

Canterbury

19

11

30

45

Cranbrook

& Weald

21

3

24

7

Dartford

19

5

25

33

Dover

14

6

20

33

Gravesham

16

7

23

23

Maidstone

17

7

25

44

Malling & Kings Hill

22

6

28

15

Sevenoaks

Town

43

3

46

4

Sevenoaks

Rural

20

4

24

19

Shepway

14

4

20

33

Swale

13

8

21

39

Thanet

12

8

20

44

Tonbridge

24

5

29

27

Tunbridge Wells

27

3

30

21

At the foot of the table come Dover, Shepway and Swale all with a 20% pass rate. However, the alternative locals test for the Dover and Shepway grammar schools, and Highsted Grammar in Sittingbourne will considerably inflate these figures. Last year, these passes provided over half of the pupils offered places at the two Dover grammar schools and Folkestone School for Girls, so the pass rates would more accurately be around 40% in each District.

Once again approximately 11.5% of all Kent automatic passes have gone to children in the private sector, but just 4% of the upheld HTAs, resulting in overall 10% of selective assessments being for children at private schools. The data calculations can only consider those children who took the Test, so the total numbers in each school year group are not known. However, a considerable proportion of these successes will not take up grammar school places, preferring to remain private.

Head Teacher Assessments

The Canterbury secret lies in the very high proportion of children who have been found selective on the HTA, at 11%, or over a third of the total and much higher than any other district. This includes 14% of girls, double the county average for girls passing the HTA, an annually recurring pattern.

Most automatic passes follow socio-economic patterns across the county, but the influence of HTAs is quite the reverse. The table below shows outcomes of the four Headteacher Assessment Panels, that operate geographically across the county. These reflect previous patterns with nearly proportionally twice as many HTAs upheld in the East of the county at 64%, to just 34% in the West, with Mid and North West Kent somewhere in between.

Head Teacher Assessments 2017

boys

girls

total

boys

%

girls

%

East Kent considered

403

481

843

48%

52%

East Kent upheld

253

311

564

45%

55%

Mid Kent Considered

301

364

665

45%

55%

Mid Kent Upheld

138

199

337

34%

12.1%

North West considered

240

217

457

53%

47%

North West upheld

127

138

265

48%

52%

West Kent considered

122

112

234

52%

48%

West Kent upheld

42

38

80

53%

47%

Total considered

1066

1174

2240

48%

52%

Total upheld

560

686

1246

45%

55%

Pupil Premium Children

Thanks to FOI requests from a number of sources, there is now considerable information available on the Kent Test performance of children on Pupil Premium (PP), socially disadvantaged children the majority of whom qualify through Free School Meals. This shows that 411 out of 4183 Kent state school children who were found selective for entry to grammar school in September 2018 were on PP, a total of 10.0%, (9.0% last year). Many more will be selected via the local tests in Dover and Shepway, areas with considerable social deprivation. It is impossible to convert this into a rate for entrance to grammar school, as the numbers are inflated by private school and out of county entrants, and there is no accurate measure of this total, but private school entrants tend to be around 10% of the total according to previous FOIs I have seen. However, these are still a small proportion of the total, so the proportion of PP pupils who will be entering Kent grammar schools in 2018, will be well above the regularly quoted fallacious 3%, and a further advance on the more accurate 6% from government figures at Year 11, for PP children in Kent grammar schools. This reflects, I like to think, changing attitudes in the Kent education sector towards these disadvantaged children, influenced by the findings of the KCC Select Committee on Social Mobility and Grammar Schools, and underlined by a number of grammar schools now giving levels of priority for these children . As the data reveals, the argument that HTAs are biased against children carrying a Pupil Premium is also false. For 37% (153 out of the 411) of PP children found selective qualified through the HTA route, as against 26% of the total number of children found selective. That is a powerful argument to demonstrate that the system supports these children at a stage where there is no influence by private tutoring. However, there is still some way to go.

I plan to look at this issue in greater detail in another article, likely after Christmas .

Out of County Passes

Each year the number of out of county Kent Test passes rises mainly due to what has been called 11 plus tourism, as too many London families apply to grammar schools around the M25 belt, or else the North West Kent grammars easily reached by rail out of SE London. This is usually accompanied by some hysterical media headlines about the consequent shortage of grammar school places for Kent children, which never actually happens, as most of these children never arrive.

Recent changes in admission policy at the two Wilmington Grammars and the Judd School to favour Kent children is further inhibiting supply of places for out of county children, but certainly not demand. For 2017 admissions, of the 2165 (2002 in 2016) ooc Kent Test passes, just 454 (up from 412 in 2016, but almost identical to 2015) were offered places in March, over half at the four Dartford and Wilmington grammars, with this number likely to have fallen further before entry in September.

Of course this large proportion of speculative test sittings, in some cases merely provides free practice for grammar schools in other parts of the country for many as can be seen by the high number of enquiries on 11 plus forums from parents in possession of a selective assessment for their child. Many of these don’t even know where the Kent grammar schools are!

But of course, it is not free for Kent taxpayers, as the costs of administration, materials and provision of test venues falls on them. Sadly, there appears no way of recovering the costs, which surely run into tens of thousands of pounds, from those parents who have no Kent connections.

Local Authorities with the Largest Number of

Out of County Assessments for Kent Test 2017

Council

Number

Assessed

Number

of Schools

Found

Selective

Grammar Places

in 2017

Bexley

1167

58

624

127

Bromley

660

61

430

88

Greenwich

756

57

365

60

Medway

505

80

242

16

Lewisham

371

63

198

23

East Sussex

157

67

94

47

Thurrock

170

32

86

29

Croydon

77

63

65

6

Barking & Dagenham

142

52

68

6

These are the same top ten as in 2017, and mostly fairly easily accessible to Kent, apart from Croydon and Barking & Dagenham. I suspect that few if any of their 123 successes will once again end up at Kent grammars in September. One can only wonder at the motives of the parents of the 12 Buckinghamshire children, the 13 from Slough, or the 7 from Norfolk who all took the Test, from a variety of primary schools, so presumably not all planning to move to Kent.

Most notable is Medway, where increasingly commonly, children in some schools take the Kent Test as the norm, along with the Medway Test. For 2017 entry fewer than 10% of the 182 Medway children found selective were offered Kent grammar places on allocation, 11 of the 16 at the tow Maidstone girls grammars, not all will have followed through on those offers as schools local to them made late offers often through appeal.

For Thurrock, 14 of the 29 offered places in 2017, were from Gravesend Grammar, but with the school reducing its intake from 174 to 150 for 2018 entry, this figures is likely to fall sharply.